SB955 would change Maryland law governing overhead transmission lines and eminent domain. The bill applies to overhead transmission lines designed to carry more than 69,000 volts and, most notably, prohibits a person constructing such a line from using condemnation to acquire property that is already encumbered by a conservation easement. It also creates a new damages remedy for certain nearby residential or agricultural property owners whose property value is diminished by a taking tied to an overhead transmission line or related infrastructure.
The bill further adjusts condemnation procedures in cases involving overhead transmission lines. If a condemnation case or appeal results in a finding that the property’s assessed value is greater than the condemning authority’s appraised value, the trial court must award reasonable counsel fees to the defendant and charge those costs to the plaintiff. The bill also clarifies that fair market value in condemnation can include diminution in value caused by the public project or related government announcements, under specified conditions. The measure takes effect October 1, 2025.
Impact
SB955 would amend the Public Utilities Article and the Real Property Article to add special eminent-domain rules for overhead transmission line projects. It would bar condemnation of property burdened by a conservation easement for this purpose, create a new cause of action for certain neighboring residential and agricultural owners, and require fee-shifting in specified condemnation outcomes involving transmission-line projects. These changes would affect electric companies, transmission developers, condemning authorities, landowners, and holders of conservation easements, while also expanding the remedies available in related property-value disputes.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears designed to protect conserved land and nearby property owners from transmission-line takings and related value losses, suggesting a property-rights and land-preservation orientation. The absence of voting history makes it impossible to assess whether the bill had bipartisan support or faced organized resistance in committee.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s restriction on eminent domain for overhead transmission lines crossing conservation easements, which would limit siting options for utilities and transmission developers. Another likely dispute is the new damages and attorney-fee provisions for nearby residential and agricultural owners, which could increase project costs and litigation exposure for condemning authorities. Supporters would likely emphasize conservation, farmland protection, and fairness to affected landowners, while opponents would likely argue the bill could impede transmission buildout and raise costs for electric infrastructure projects.